Loading...
Minutes 05-15-03MEETING MINUTES OF THE CONTINUED REGULAR MEETING OF THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY HELD IN COMMISSION CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA, ON THURSDAY, MAY 15, 2003 AT 6:30 P.M. Present Larry Finkelstein, Chair Douglas Hutchinson, CRA Director Jeanne Heavilin, Vice Chair Lindsey Payne, Board Attorney Jose Aguila Susan Vielhauer, Controller Don Fenton Michelle Hoyland Alexander DeMarco Absent Henderson Tillman I. Call to Order Chairman Finkelstein called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. II. Roll Call The Recording Secretary called the roll and declared that a quorum was present. III. Agenda Approval: Chairman Finkelstein announced that the Hall property item that was approved at Tuesday night's meeting had to be readdressed because there is a change in the amount of the check. This item would be added as Item IX.A. under New Business. With regard to Item VIII.A., "Ocean District Plan Presentation from City Staff," Mr. Aguila asked if the Board would accept the Plan tonight for review and that the plan could be reviewed in depth at a future workshop, which members agreed to. Motion Ms. Hoyland moved to approve the agenda, as amended. Motion seconded by Vice Chair Heavilin and unanimously carried. IV. Consent Agenda (Previously approved) V. Public Audience - None Meeting Minutes Continued Community Redevelopment Agency Regular Meeting Boynton Beach, Florida May 15, 2003 IV. Public Hearing - None IX. New Business - (Moved Up) D. Consideration of Direct Incentive Request from Boynton Ventures L.L.C. (The Arches Project) Mr. Hutchinson, CRA Director, stated that this was the first application request for funding under the Direct Incentive Program that the Board previously approved. The purpose of the Program is to encourage projects in a responsible way, as well as being responsive to the marketplace. He pointed out that there is no other incentive program within the CRA for development. The Directive Incentive Plan is based upon performance and the Program was viewed by what Boynton Beach was getting and a scoring system was established to determine this. Mr. Hutchinson did not feel that they would be able to attract high caliber projects if these types of incentives were not available. Staff reviewed the application and the project scored well in all categories. Mr. Hutchinson pointed out that it is the CRA's mission to create taxes and this particular project is valued at $104,000,000 that will bring in approximately $74,000,000 in taxes. The project encompasses two blocks and has a current property value of $2.6 million. For a ten-year period, adjusting for inflation, the project should generate approximately $9.4 million in total taxes, one-half of which could be used for future incentives. This will be done on an annual basis. Mr. Hutchinson pointed out that $470,000 per year represents 40% of the CRA's budget and this is after issuance of the proposed incentives. Mr. Hutchinson said that the CRA will require confirmation from the appropriate third parties that the taxes are paid and that there are no liens on the property. No feasibility study will be required because the applicant is a developer and no third party economic impact studies and appraisals were furnished. Mr. Hutchinson reviewed the scoring criteria as follows: Project Size - New assessed value -20 points $25 million and above - 20 points Type of Project - Mixed use with residential component - up to 20 points Project Location - The project is comprised of two major blocks in the CBD and is eligible up to 20 points Economic Impact - The annual projected incentive is $410,359 and the annual throughput is 60.5 times the annual incentive. Scoring for economic impact requires 50 times incentive or greater for annual 2 Meeting Minutes Continued Community Redevelopment Agency Regular Meeting Boynton Beach, Florida May 15, 2003 throughput to receive the maximum 20 points. This project would be eligible for the maximum. Project Quality - There are no set points for this category. The scoring is discretionary and can go up to 40 points. The applicant has applied for a front-end loan of $2 million, which is less than half of the incentive package. The developer must guaranty the loan, plus any ancillary covenants and bank loans, plus payment of interest and any associated costs. The developer will be expected to pledge any increment incentive that they may gain or have available. It is anticipated that this front-end loan would be retired very quickly. Staff is recommending consideration of the project in three steps: Approve analysis and use of the Incentive Program. Score the project. Consideration of underwriting guaranty of any front-end funding incentive. Mr. Aguila inquired how the applicant came up with the $2 million front-end figure. Mr. Hutchinson explained that the Program only allows the applicant to receive no more than 50% of the money that they bring to the CRA and this sum will be paid to the applicant after they pay their taxes. Because this project would not have any money coming in at first, they would be allowed to hold the 50%. He pointed out that the applicant will be paying out a great amount of money for infrastructure on these projects. There are three methods of payout available: (1) an up-front lump sum; (2) 50% each year; or (3) a modified front loading that would taper off at the end. Mr. Aguila inquired when the applicant would receive the $2 million. Mr. Hutchinson noted that staff is recommending that the applicant have their funding in place before they receive any funds. The Incentive Program would have the project as collateral. Mr. Aguila asked about dsks. Mr. Hutchinson said that this would be covered in the legal documents. Mr. Hutchinson pointed out the size and commitment of the project. The Program is intended for large-scale developers and has been reviewed by legal. Attorney Payne noted that this would also depend upon how the collateral is structured and how much risk the Board is willing to take. The possibility exists that sometimes a lawsuit is required to recover the funds. Chairman Finkelstein inquired what the collateral would be for the project. Mr. Hutchinson responded that they would require whatever type of security that a bank or traditional lending source would require. This would have to be 3 Meeting Minutes Continued Community Redevelopment Agency Regular Meeting Boynton Beach, Florida May 15, 2003 determined. It is the responsibility of the applicant to present collateral that would satisfy the Board. Kevin Lawler, Managing Partner of N-K Ventures LC, and Manager of Boynton Ventures 1 LLC, the applicant, explained that once they secure the financing and before they start the project, they will enter into a Completion Guaranty with their construction lender. This document means that they guaranty that they will complete the project and that they have all the necessary resources to do so. Mr. Lawler said that they would also enter into a Completion Guaranty with the CRA to ensure that the project gets on the tax rolls. Chairman Finkelstein asked what the backup would be for the Completion Guaranty. Mr. Lawler stated that they purchase insurance to insure that the project is completed. This would be separate and apart from the bonding. The project will not begin until they secure a construction loan and 86% of the revenue will come from the sale of units. He pointed out that construction would not begin until they have reached the pre-sale levels, which are approximately 50% to 55% of the total project. They are asking that the CRA fund certain items that are above and beyond customary costs, such as public space, free parking, etc. Mr. Lawler said that they would negotiate a funding schedule with the CRA, subject to the applicant spending the money. They would then seek reimbursement under the requirements of Chapter 163 of the Florida Statutes that the money has been spent for public benefit improvements. Ms. Hoyland asked Mr. Lawler to elaborate on the funds being spent on public space and parking. Mr. Lawler explained that the front portion of the project has been opened up for the public to create a large public plaza. The cost of the plaza is expensive and they added approximately 15,000 to 20,000 square feet of retail space to the project. Normally, they would not have this much retail in their projects. As a result of the additional retail, this had an effect on the parking. He also pointed out that the private amenities are being placed on top of the garage, which increased the costs of the project. To provide this much public space, they will incur over $4 million in additional costs. Mr. Lawler also noted the quality of the materials being used, as well as the landscaping. Ms. Hoyland inquired if the funds being applied for would be used for infrestructure and upgrades. Mr. Lawler explained that the City will be vacating the existing public utilities in the alley between Ocean Avenue and SE 1st Street and they will be paying their pre-rata share of the utility costs. Mr. Lawler said that they were not applying for the incentives for utility costs. Ms. Hoyland inquired if the public space would be dedicated by an easement. Mr. Lawler responded that the public space would be open 24 hours per day, 365 days per week. They will maintain it and it will always be open to the public. 4 Meeting Minutes Continued Community Redevelopment Agency Regular Meeting Boynton Beach, Florida May 15, 2003 Ms. Hoyland would like assurances that this arrangement would not change. Mr. Lawler responded that he would expect the public space to remain during the useful life of the project. He also noted that when the condo association documents are drafted, they would spell out exactly the obligations and responsibilities for maintenance and care of the public area. They intend to leave a significant amount of money in the project to fund the maintenance of the public spaces for a long period of time. Attorney Payne pointed out that all arrangements are subject to change and there is never a 100% guaranty. Mr. Hutchinson pointed out that the ultimate security for the incentive is the project and the economic retum it will generate. Mr. Lawler said that every deal that he and Ms. Graham have done, they have always lived up to the terms of the agreement. Ms. Hoyland inquired if the Board did not approve their request, would they proceed with an alternative. Mr. Lawler said he would have to discuss this with his partners and they would have to determine how they would offset $4.5 million to $5 million in direct costs that they had not anticipated. He did not wish to elaborate any further on what might happen under those circumstances. Attorney Payne suggested that there could be a provision that the money would have to stay in public space for so many years and if it did not, it would have to be paid back. Mr. Aguila inquired how the reimbursement would work and Mr. Lawler said that an agreement would be negotiated and the terms under which they would receive reimbursement would be included in the agreement. First, they will do the design and engineering and then begin pre-marketing. These costs amount to approximately $3 million to $4 million before they receive any financing from their lender. Demolition and construction would then begin. It would be determined prior to this what would trigger public expenditures and when they could apply for the front loading. This would probably take place when construction of the garage and the public plaza begin. The applicant will fund all of this. At that point they would come before the Board for reimbursement in accordance with the draw schedule. The Board will be provided with their construction timelines. Ms. Hoyland noted that the applicant's feasibility study gave a timeline for the garage at January 2006 and construction of the plaza spaces in May 2006. Mr. Lawler thought that construction of the garage would begin in 2003. Their current construction plans call for starting on the north block where the Dolphin Restaurant is located. It is anticipated that the garage would be completed by 2005. Chairman Finkelstein made the following comments. He did not think that he could support any further incentives other than the ones already granted. The 5 Meeting Minutes Continued Community Redevelopment Agency Regular Meeting Boynton Beach, Florida May 15, 2003 land use, zoning and density changes contributed approximately 3,800 square feet of land to the project. He based his opinion upon the feasibility study and the appraisal included in the application. He did not think that incentives were necessary to-make this a successful project. He also referred to the applicant's Lantana project where they only received the same land use and zoning changes. He noted that The Arches is twice the density of the Marina Project. He was much in favor of the project and felt that it was the type of project that was needed in the downtown area. He thought that there should be some "real" public amenities, such as an amphitheater or additional spaces in the garage so that it would not be necessary to build another public garage in another location. The public space being provided is just good planning, circulation and outdoor dining, which are proper amenities for people to frequent the area. Chairman Finkelstein disagreed with the basis upon which the incentives are being requested and does not understand the logic for upfront money. He pointed out that there was no real additional parking above what the Code required and, in fact, the project is short a few spaces. There are no infrastructure impediments and water and sewer lines are available as well as off-site, stormwater connections. He noted that the new Marina developer turned down the offer of additional incentives and is willing to end an existing developer's agreement that would give them approximately $1 million in incentives. Further, Chairman Finkelstein pointed out that financial needs to construct the project have been met and the project has a profit potential between $18.3 million to $29.8 million, which is a 25% to 40% return on investment. Chairman Finkelstein felt that giving away this amount of money would affect their budget, as well as current and future projects. The Heart of Boynton development has risks associated with it and the TIF income helps fund these types of projects, as well as public amenities, such as Riverwalk and the Promenade. He reiterated that he fully supports the project, but cannot support the request for incentives, if the Board decided to support the request, Chairman Finkelstein requested that the upfront funds not be approved. Further, he could not equate $4.5 million to the 12,500 square feet of public space. Mr. Aguila felt that the design of the project gives the perception of a public welcoming place and is a good project on its own merits. Mr. Aguila was less concerned what the funds would be buying, but what the project would provide overall to the City. Ms. Hoyland inquired what the parking requirement was and what is the applicant providing. Mr. Hutchinson responded that the applicant has met the parking requirements, but if anything is changed it could affect the parking requirements. Ms. Hoyland noted that the project has the exact amount of parking spaces that they are supposed to provide in accordance with their proposed use. Mr. 6 Meeting Minutes Continued Community Redevelopment Agency Regular Meeting Boynton Beach, Florida May 15, 2003 Hutchinson also pointed out that there would be 35 on-street parking spaces provided. Ms. Hoyland thought the project was exactly what they have been looking for and wants to see the project move forward. She pointed out that the money would not be spent immediately and that other projects would be coming on line from which TIF income would be derived. Mr. Fenton wanted to know if the applicant considered the archway as public property. Mr. Lawler responded that the archway provided public access. The 12,500 square feet comprises the plaza space only, but the land under the arches is public area. Mr. Fenton did not want to see the project redesigned. He felt that this was the best thing that could happen downtown and that the project would increase the value of other properties. He pointed out that the TIF income is not their money and that it belongs to the community. The Board does not have the right to hold onto the money to wait for something down the road that may or may not come in from a developer. He would like to move forward with awarding the incentive money to the applicant. Mr. Fenton said that the Board hired Mr. Hutchinson specifically for these purposes and that he should be allowed to work out the proper agreements with the applicant and then bdng them to the Board for consideration. Ms. Hoyland referenced the Marina Project and noted that they asked for more than a few waivers. They are only providing 143 parking spaces on each level of the garage and asked for 70 parking spaces in lieu of at only $1,000 per space. Had they built another level, they could have had the 70 spaces that they needed, plus an additional 70 spaces for the public. Also, the Board was uncomfortable with the height of the building, the parking situation and the location of the townhomes and many other things. She did not think that the two projects could be compared. She noted that The Arches is very appealing and is wrapped with beautiful four and five story buildings. Ms. Hoyland felt that the project on its merits meets the criteria for the request. Attorney Payne pointed out that the Board would have to score the project to determine its eligibility. Attorney Payne asked for clarification for the exact name of the applicant and Mr. Lawler informed her that the applicant was Boynton Ventures 1 L.L.C., a Flodda corporation, of which there are two shareholders N-K Ventures LC and Maxwell Real Estate Group, each of which own 50% of Boynton Ventures I L.L.C. Chairman Finkelstein noted that the Board must determine if they want to make the incentive assignable. Vice Chair Heavilin asked for clarification on the exact amount of the incentive. She was informed that the amount was $4.7 million over a ten-year period using 7 Meeting Minutes Continued Community Redevelopment Agency Regular Meeting Boynton Beach, Florida May 15, 2003 a formula that if everything goes according to the plans that would be the total capture figure over ten years. Members scored the project as follows: Michelle Hoyland · Project Size 20 · Type of Project 20 · Project Location 20 · Economic Impact 20 · Project Quality 30 · Total 110 3oints 3oints 3oints ~oints ~oints 3oints 3. 4. 5. 6. Mr. Aguila scored the project at 110 points. Vice Chair Heavilin scored the project at 110 points. Mr. Fenton scored the project at 110 points. Mr. DeMarco scored the project at 110 points. Chairman Finkelstein scored the project at 110 points. As a result of the scoring, the project would be eligible for 100% of the requested funding that would be applied to a formula. Chairman Finkelstein opened the meeting to the public. William Cwynar, 2701 SW 8th Street, Boynton Beach said that at first he had some major concerns about the $2 million incentive and did not want to see the developer receive this amount of money without having some accountability. When he heard that the applicant would now have to first spend the money and then be reimbursed, he was in favor of it. Mr. Cwynar felt with all the construction that will be taking place in the downtown area that at some point the parking situation would be resolved. If after five years there was still a problem with downtown parking, this shows that the downtown is in good shape economically. Bob Foot, a resident of Coastal Tower, felt that obtaining the Guaranty of Completion was an important component of the funding considering the amount of money involved. Bob Ensler, 26 Woods Lane, said that the project should be looked at as a whole and not in pieces. He would like to see the project come to fruition and felt that staff was capable of working out the details with the developer. This was a major step for the City and it was important to make it work. Ginny Foot, a local retailer on East Ocean Avenue, welcomed the new project and was very excited about it. She felt it would be a landmark for downtown, a drawing card and a destination. She was pleased to see the amount of retail 8 Meeting Minutes Continued Community Redevelopment Agency Regular Meeting Boynton Beach, Florida May 15, 2003 space that would be going in and sensed that this would make downtown Boynton Beach the destination place that it should be. Barclay Garnsey, 326 SW 1st Avenue, was excited about the project and thought it was well designed. He was glad to see that there would be public parking provided. Motion Mr. Aguila moved to approve the applicant's request for the Direct IncentiVe Program as presented by the staff report; that the Board accept the overall scoring of 110 points; and that the request for front end funding in an amount not to exceed $2,000,000 to cover the public space and access to free parking, with the remainder to be distributed over the ten years following project completion; and that the final agreements still need to be negotiated between the CRA Board and the developer. Motion seconded by Vice Chair Heavilin. Mr. Fenton requested that the motion be amended to exclude the words "following project completion." Mr. Aguila amended his motion to exclude the words "following project completion." Vice Chair Heavilin amended her second of the motion. Mr. DeMarco said that he would like to see the City land bank property so that when it is needed the land would be available for public parking. He did not want the City to end up like Delray Beach with all its parking problems. Mr. Hutchinson said that this would be coming to the Board in a few months. Ms. Hoyland also would like assurances that the actual agreement would come back to the Board for ratification and not just for signature. Chairman Finkelstein stated that he would not support it, but reserved the right to support it when he sees the documents. Vote Motion carried 5-1 (Chairman Finkelstein dissenting). IV. Director's Report A. Updates Included in the agenda packet V. Old Business A. Ocean District Plan Presentation from City Staff 9 Meeting Minutes Continued Community Redevelopment Agency Regular Meeting Boynton Beach, Florida May 15, 2003 Motion Mr. Aguila moved that we accept for review and evaluation the Ocean Distdct Plan as submitted by City staff and that a future workshop be scheduled as soon as possible to review and discuss the Plan. Motion seconded by Ms. Hoyland and unanimously carried. B. Consideration of Adoption of Investment Policy Chairman Finkelstein pointed out that the newest version was distributed tonight. Staff and the Attorney have reviewed the Policy and all outstanding issues were addressed in the latest version. Attorney Payne said that she has not reviewed the latest version. Chairman Finkelstein recommended that the Policy be approved and if any member has a problem with the Policy after looking at it, it could be addressed at a later date. Ms. Vielhauer requested that the motion be made in three parts as follows: (1) that the Investment Policy be approved; (2) to decide if the Board wants to join the State Investment Pool (SBA), which would require a Resolution; and (3) staff would like to go out for an RFQ for a financial adviser that could also handle lending and budgeting issues. Motion Ms. Hoyland moved to approve the Investment Policy as presented. Motion seconded by Mr. DeMarco and unanimously carried. Attorney Payne read Resolution No. 03-01 by title only regarding the Board joining the SBA. Motion seconded by Mr. DeMarco and unanimously carried. Motion Vice Chair Heavilin moved that the Board approve an RFQ for a financial adviser. Motion seconded by Ms. Hoyland. Mr. Fenton felt that the RFQ should exclude the investment policy portion. He said that if this were included in the RFQ, the financial adviser would charge the Board for financial advice on a fee basis for virtually doing nothing due to the restrictions on investments. Chairman Finkelstein pointed out that the RFQ would be for a financial advisory firm to develop a comprehensive financial plan, which will look at a projected five- year CRA budget and analyze the CRA needs. They would be asked to provide services for investing surplus reserve funds, as well as direction on financial structure for funding CRA programs and projects, including, but not limited to, securing bonds, loans, etc. 10 Meeting Minutes Continued Community Redevelopment Agency Regular Meeting Boynton Beach, Florida May 15, 2003 Mr. Fenton felt that the way the Investment Policy Manual was written that it was not necessary to have a financial advisor advising the Board where the money could be invested since this is already set out in the Manual itself. He felt that Ms. Vielhauer should be able to handle this. Chairman Finkelstein did not think that Ms. Vielhauer, as Controller, is a financial securities specialist. Mr. Fenton explained that the Investment Policy Manual is the guide for Ms. Vielhauer. Chairman Finkelstein asked Ms. Vielhauer if she felt qualified to do this type of investing. Mr. Fenton stated that Ms. Vielhauer is not qualified, but this Board has the control of the money and the Board can instruct her to get the best available rates for a certain period of time. Ms. Vielhauer said that she is capable of obtaining quotes, but she would like the CRA to go a step above this and instead of going into Treasury Bills there may be vehicles available that could make more money. She thinks it would be advantageous for the CRA to have a financial advisor look at their 5-year plan and to make suggestions. Mr. Aguila pointed out that the RFQ is seeking qualified financial people and when the applications are received, that would be the time to determine what their responsibilities would be when the fee is negotiated. Chairman Finkelstein pointed out that at this time all staff is asking for is approval for an RFQ. Vote The motion carried 6-0. RECESS WAS DECLARED AT 8:20 P.M. THE MEETING RECONVENED AT 8:30 P.M. It was decided to move to New Business and address Items A. and B. and then go back to Old Business to address Item VIII.C. (Human Resources Manual) IX. New Business A. Consideration of Deposit of Funds for Purchase of the Hall Property Chairman Finkelstein referred to the memo from Susan Vielhauer to the Board dated May 15, 2003 that requested a revised amount for the Hall property in the amount of $266,850.19. This money would be wired into the escrow account of the attorney for purchase of the property. 11 Meeting Minutes Continued Community Redevelopment Agency Regular Meeting Boynton Beach, Florida May 15, 2003 Motion Ms. Hoyland moved to approve the request to wire $266,850.19 into the escrow account of the attorney for the purchase of the Hall property. Motion seconded by Vice Chair Heavilin and unanimously carried. Consideration of Contract with Kimley-Horn/Burkhardt Construction for Design Build of Boynton Beach Boulevard Extension, promenade and Riverwalk Chairman Finkelstein requested that the word 'SIDEWALK" on page 1622 be changed to 'RIVERWALK." Attorney Payne pointed out that the Board needs to make some decisions regarding the contract and pointed out that there are "blanks" in the contract that need to be filled in. The first blank was on page 1626 in paragraph 2.a. It was noted that some kind of "guidebook needed to be inserted in the blank. Chairman Finkelstein suggested using the Visions 20/20 plans and schematics previously prepared by Quincy Johnson. All this information could be placed into one book that could be used as a Guidebook. It was decided to call the guidebook the "Boulevard Extension/Promenade/Riverwalk Concept Design Book." On Page 1627, in paragraph c.3, there is a "blank" before the word "Sum" and Chairman Finkelstein suggested inserting the word "Lump" in the blank. He noted that in Exhibit H the "lump sum" was $422,200. Mr. Aguila felt that the agreement was unclear and very confusing. He asked Mr. Hutchinson to explain exactly what they were getting for their money. Chairman Finkelstein was of the same opinion and thought the agreement was derived by using two different agreements. Mr. Hutchinson pointed out that when you start setting fixed lump sums for a design-build project, it defeats the purpose of doing this type of project. He explained that when you do a design build project, the work is reviewed as it is done. Also, Mr. Aguila inquired what the budget was for this project, and Chairman Finkelstein said there was none because they do not have a design. Chairman Finkelstein would like the project done in phases so that the Board could change things as the project progressed. He would like to have a contractor locked in for 100% of the contract, but not the price. Vince Burkhardt, of Burkhardt Construction, explained that after looking at several different contracts, they prepared a joint contract that was used by the Engineering Council. Also, Attorney Payne came up with the format that had been used by another county. He felt that the contract that did give the Board the 100% that Chairman Finkelstein wanted. Mr. Burkhardt was under the impression that the Board was only going to approve phase 1, or up to 30% of 12 Meeting Minutes Continued Community Redevelopment Agency Regular Meeting Boynton Beach, Florida May 15, 2003 the design. This should tell the Board exactly what the project is going to be, as set out in Exhibit G on page 1678 and the scope of work is set out on pages 1675 through 1680. Attorney Payne said that the agreement could be done either way. The money part could be left open ended or a budget could be established. Mr. Burkhardt felt that a budget needed to be established because as Kimley-Horn begins the design, it is up to Burkhardt Construction to design and build within the budget. Mr. Aguila inquired if there was a budget, and Mr. Hutchinson said that it was around $8.7 million. Mr. Burkhardt said that these items should be discussed at their first meeting. Mr. Burkhardt introduced Russell Barnes from Kimley-Horn. Mr. Burkhardt noted that at the end of the 30% schematic design phase, the scope of the project should be known and at that time, construction dollars could be applied for. Chairman Finkelstein pointed out that in this budget there is $750,000 for the project. Mr. Aguila noted that the project consisted of five tasks. · The first task is the gathering of information and programming. Mr. Burkhardt stated that this is listed in task 1 on Page 1673. · The second task is the schematic design. A design will be developed based on previous studies and the Board's feedback in order to form a more defined picture, including the preliminary estimate of costs. · The third task is design-development. · The fourth task is preparation of the construction documents. · The fifth task is the bidding and permitting and then construction. Discussion ensued about the costs. Mr. Barnes said that they would provide the Board with various options on what types of materials they would like so that the Board can determine how much money they want to spend on a particular item. This would mean that the Board would have the option to set the budget as a working document as the project progresses or a set budget could be established and they would work within that budget. Mr. Barnes suggested that the Board should have options as the project progresses. This will allow the Board to determine where they want the money spent. Mr. Burkhardt felt that the document needed to be cleaned up since they used another municipality's document for their format. Attorney Payne pointed out that Section 3 and the Total Project are not consistent. Mr. Aguila requested that he be provided an opportunity to thoroughly review the document and to define the scopes better. He will provide his comments to Mr. Hutchinson and Attorney Payne; therefore, he recommended tabling the item until the next meeting. 13 Meeting Minutes Continued Community Redevelopment Agency Regular Meeting Boynton Beach, Florida May 15, 2003 Chairman Finkelstein said that he was in agreement with the outline on how the contract should work. He noted that on Page 1631 the amount of the penalty needs to be filled in. On Page 1635 there is a blank that needs to be filled in regarding the amount of copies that should be submitted. He suggested "three." On Page 1671 Chairman Finkelstein noted that the language "project west of the Marina" needs to be clarified. Motion Ms. Hoyland moved to table the Contract Consideration until the next meeting. Motion seconded by Mr. Aguila. Vice Chair Heavilin inquired who the "maintenance personnel" were on Page 1628, Section D.3. Chairman Finkelstein suggested that Mr. Hutchinson's name be substituted in place of "maintenance personnel." Mr. Burkhardt requested that he be included in the negotiations with Attomey Payne and Mr. Aguila, which Attorney Payne agreed to. Vote The motion unanimously carried C. Consideration of Human Resources Manual Ms. Lori Barefoot, of HR Management Partners, Inc. assumed the podium. Chairman Finkelstein noted that Ms. Barefoot incorporated the Board's requests made at the workshop into the Report and performed the tasks that the Board requested. Ms. Barefoot explained that the blue printing in the Manual is the questions and policy decisions that the Board needs to address. Attorney Payne pointed out that the document is twofold. The first part is the HR Management Report on compensation comparisons and the second part is the Policy and Procedures Manual. Ms. Barefoot stated that they performed a salary survey, a benefit survey, and a compensation survey for staff. ,Attorney Payne said that she reviewed the changes and felt they were consistent with the Board's direction. Ms. Hoyland requested to hear from staff. Ms. Vielhauer said that she reviewed the documents and she has four pages of comments regarding items that were not correct. She also has questions and noted that some of the items requested were left out. Ms. Vielhauer felt that the documents still required a great deal of work, and she would be glad to share her comments with the Board. Ms. Barefoot said that she has not seen Ms. Vielhauer's comments. 14 Meeting Minutes Continued Community Redevelopment Agency Regular Meeting Boynton Beach, Florida May 15, 2003 Ms. Hoyland suggested that the Board review staff's comments and that the documents should be further reviewed at a workshop. Mr. Hutchinson noted that there was no employment contract for the Director. Ms. Barefoot responded that this was not within the scope of their services. Attorney Payne said that she would draft the agreement for the Director. Mr. Hutchinson said he was under the impression that the Director's employment contract would refer to certain sections in the Policy and Procedure Manual. He pointed out that the Manual has specific language that it would not include contract employees. Mr. Hutchinson requested that a dreft of his contract be prepared so that when the Manual is adopted, he would be part of the staff. Attorney Payne assured Mr. Hutchinson that this would all be done at one time. Chairman Finkelstein thought that this had been discussed at the previous workshop and that there would be a contract that referred to the manual and a manual for employees. Attorney Payne said that the entire Manual cannot be applied to contract employees because a great deal of the provisions do not apply to contract employees. Mr. Hutchinson would like assurances that the document being prepared reflects that this is not the entire document to hire staff, and he has concerns that there is specific language in the Manual that eliminates contract employees. These things should be developed concurrently so that everyone knows where they stand. Mr. Hutchinson also pointed out that there is no retirement program and there is a comment that the CRA should become part of the City's retirement system. Attorney Payne said that after the results of the survey were known, these decisions could be made. He stated that they were promised some kind or retirement program. Chairman Finkelstein inquired if this was in Mr. Hutchinson's contract, and Mr. Hutchinson responded that it was in the advertisement to hire him. He pointed out that the document submitted tonight does not address these issues. Mr. Aguila was of the opinion that people have been working for many months without any solid terms of employment. He would like the Board to move this along at a faster pace. Chairman Finkelstein pointed out that the Board hired a consultant specifically for this purpose. If there are that many outstanding issues, Chairman Finkelstein felt it should be addressed at a workshop. Mr. Fenton said that when a retirement plan is adopted for staff, it should be retroactive. He thought that this had already been decided upon and all that was remaining was to select a pension plan. Mr. Fenton noted that it was never the intention of the Board that the CRA staff would not have a pension plan. 15 Meeting Minutes Continued Community Redevelopment Agency Regular Meeting Boynton Beach, Florida May 15, 2003 Ms. Barefoot explained that because the scope of their services was expanded at the February workshop, it took a lot longer to do the survey because of all the detail involved. Motion Ms. Hoyland moved to table this item to a workshop and that the manual, the four pages of staff's comments, and a draft of Mr. Hutchinson's contract be available for signature and that a qualified pension advisor speak to the Board. Attorney Payne said that she could not prepare a draft of Mr. Hutchinson's contract without more direction and that she needed more information. Ms. Barefoot stated that they surveyed four independent CRAs and the Board will be able to see how they addressed these same concerns. Mr. Hutchinson noted that the consultant provided a survey with data, plus recommendations for three other options. However, a specialist is needed to determine what is the right plan for them. Ms. Barefoot noted that the City of Riviera Beach was close to Boynton's CRA and they have a 403(b) plan. She suggested that Mr. Hutchinson contact the City of Riviera Beach to obtain a copy of their pension plan. Ms. Hoyland withdrew her prior motion and made the following new motion. Motion Ms. Hoyland moved to table the item before the Board to a workshop meeting so that the four page comments by staff and the manual can be reviewed to determine how the comments would affect the manual. All Board members will review the blue comments in the manual and make a decision. The Director will contact the City of Riviera Beach to obtain information and documentation regarding their 403(b) Retirement Program and staff will set up a workshop within the next couple of weeks, prior to the Board's next CRA meeting. Motion seconded by Mr. Aguila. This would be the only item discussed at this workshop. Ms. Hoyland requested to add to her motion that Legal Counsel will also prepare a preliminary contract for the CRA Director for presentation at the workshop. Mr. Aguila seconded the amended motion. The motion carried 6-0. Ms. Barefoot said that she would like to have the feedback from the workshop. Chairman Finkelstein said that they would provide this to her. F. Consideration of TCEA (Moved up on the agenda) 16 Meeting Minutes Continued Community Redevelopment Agency Regular Meeting Boynton Beach, Florida May 15, 2003 Dick Hudson, Senior Planner, stated that staff is seeking funding and authorization to utilize the City's procurement services process to select a consultant to conduct a Transportation Concurrency Exemption Area (TCEA) within the Community Redevelopment Area. The Study would ultimately be adopted in the City's Comprehensive Plan. The purpose is to ensure that future redevelopment and projects within the study area would be exempt from meeting traffic concurrency. Staff has determined that most of the objections received are from FDOT. Other municipalities have found that it is much easier to get amendments approved by utilizing the TCEA method. By utilizing the City's procurement services with the RFP, their staff would help with the advertising and assist with the first cut of the consulting firms, and they would develop the contract. Once the contract is entered into, it would then be determined what the boundaries would be for the TCEA. It is anticipated that the costs for the study would be no more than $35,000. Vice Chair Heavilin inquired who would bear the costs and Mr. Hudson responded that it was the CRA. Ms. Hoyland explained how the process works in Delray Beach that has had much success with its TCEA. Motion Vice Chair Heavilin moved to authorize staff to move forward through the City's Procurement Services Process to assist staff in selecting consultant services to conduct a Transportation Concurrency Exemption Area traffic study for the CRA at an amount not to exceed $35,000 in consulting fees. Motion seconded by Ms. Hoyland and unanimously carried. G. Consideration of Core Grant Payment (moved up on agenda) Octavia Sherrod, Community Improvement Manager, Department of Development, referred to her memorandum dated May 7, 2003 to Mr. Hutchinson. Staff is requesting that the CRA assume responsibility of administering the Palm Beach County Core Region Grants. Currently, they are in round seven and there were some applications that were presented and reviewed by the City and staff recommended them for consideration by the County's Office of Economic Development for funding. The County reviewed the applications and has determined that two companies are eligible for a match grant. Innovative Window Concepts Boynton Seafood *United Forward, Inc. Total: County Funds Local Funds Private Funds $48,000 $25,000 $ 289,216 $18,000 $10,000 $ 46,000 $50,000 $50,000 $1,384,146 $116,000 $85,000 $1,719,362 17 Meeting Minutes Continued Community Redevelopment Agency Regular Meeting Boynton Beach, Florida May 15, 2003 The United Forward, Inc. grant will be matched by Community Improvement Departmental funds. The reason that staff is requesting that the CRA take over the responsibilities for the Core Regions Grant is because funding has become an issue and more and more inquiries are coming in. The possibility exists that there may be more than one round per year and as the downtown keeps developing, more business owner's would be requesting funding and they cannot fund the program. Chairman Finkelstein inquired if Innovative Window Concepts was located within the CRA, and Ms. Sherrod stated that the requirements are that a business must be located within or adjacent to a CRA or the business would be providing jobs to residents who live in impoverished areas. This is a County requirement. Chairman Finkelstein asked if they could change the requirements and Ms. Sherrod stated that they cannot change the County rules, but the CRA could establish their own criteria. An applicant must meet the County's rules and regulations. Mr. Hutchinson said that he met with Pam Nolan from the County's Economic Development Office and if the CRA decides to take over the program, staff would require that the applicants must be in the CRA, otherwise staff does not want to take over the administration of the program. The County said that it could be done this way. Chairman Finkelstein inquired if there was money in the budget and staff to handle this added responsibility. Mr. Hutchinson responded that there is an incentive line item in the budget and he feels there is enough money in it. If necessary, they could always do a line item adjustment. Mr. Hutchinson noted that the Delray Beach CRA has used this program to a great extent and staff met with their staff and they have a system in place, which they would be using. Ms. Hoyland inquired how much money was in the budget for this item and was informed it was $100,000, Mr. Hutchinson noted that since the downtown will be undergoing a tremendous amount of redevelopment, this would be a good means to help the small businesses move into the projects. Ms. Hoyland inquired how much time it took Ms. Sherrod's office to administer the program. Ms. Vielhauer responded that she met with representatives of the Delray Beach CRA and they informed her that they spend approximately three to four hours a week when the program is advertised. When the applications are received, it could take upwards of six hours to review and they budget $100,000 for the program. Quintus Green, Development Director, felt that this would be a good program for the CRA and of the seven previous projects that were approved, five of them 18 Meeting Minutes Continued Community Redevelopment Agency Regular Meeting Boynton Beach, Florida May 15, 2003 were in the CRA. This program would also work well with the facade grant program within the CRA. With regard to the two outstanding grants, they have been approved by the County and are awaiting the contract. The CRA would enter into its own contract with the business owner. Ms. Hoyland would like to see the CRA take over the Program and would like to see the boundaries established. Ms. Sherrod pointed out that Boynton Seafood is in the CRA and Innovative Window Concepts is a new business located on High Ridge Road. Ms. Hoyland was in favor of granting the money to Boynton Seafood, but not Innovative Window Concepts. Ms. Sherrod noted that Innovative Window Concepts would be creating jobs for people who live in the CRA and this is an important aspect of economic development. Vice Chair Heavilin inquired if staff would be comfortable in handling this program and Mr. Hutchinson said that they would. Motion Ms. Hoyland moved that the CRA assume full responsibilitY for administering the Palm Beach County Core Regions Grant and provide $35,000 to fund two pending applications; $25,000 to Innovative Window Concepts and $10,000 to Boynton Seafood, and that the Board look at limiting the requirements for location of businesses to be within the CRA District only and will not assume any pending applications other than the two listed. Ms. Hoyland inquired if this was a reimbursable arrangement. Ms. Sherrod stated that the business owner has to do the improvements, pay for them, and submit their paid invoices and cancelled checks to receive reimbursement. Then the County will issue their check payable to the CRA. Attorney Payne pointed out that future grant agreements between the County and the City will have to be changed to the CRA. Mr. Aguila seconded the motion. Mr. Fenton felt that the motion should be in separate motions. The first motion would be to accept the program and the second motion would be to approve the two grants. Attorney Payne stated that this was not necessary and that one motion would suffice. Ms. Hoyland withdrew her motion and Mr. Aguila withdrew his second of the motion. 19 Meeting Minutes Continued Community Redevelopment Agency Regular Meeting Boynton Beach, Florida May 15, 2003 Motion Ms. Hoyland moved that the CRA assume full responsibility for administering the Palm Beach-County Core Regions Grant Program. Motion seconded by Mr. Aguila and carried 5-1 (Mr. DeMarco dissenting). Motion Ms. Hoyland moved that the newly accepted Palm Beach County Core Regions Grant Program be limited to the boundaries of the CRA, as they exist today. Motion seconded by Mr. Aguila and unanimously carried. Motion Ms. Hoyland moved to accept the pending applications for Innovative Window Concepts for $25,000 and Boynton Seafood for $10,000 as the CRA's responsibility for a total amount of $35,000 as a separate economic incentives line item. Motion seconded by Mr. Aguila. Mr. DeMarco requested that there be a vote on each application individually. Ms. Hoyland withdrew her motion. Motion Ms. Hoyland moved to accept Innovative Window Concepts' pending application for $25,000 as the CRA's responsibility in a separate economic incentives line item. Motion seconded by Mr. Aguila and unanimously carried. Motion Ms. Hoyland moved to accept Boynton Seafood's pending application for $10,000 as the CRA's responsibility in a separate economic incentives line item. Motion seconded by Mr. Aguila and unanimously carried. Consideration of Revision of Direct Incentive Program for Heart of Boynton Projects Mr. Hutchinson reported that staff would like to lower some of the threshold scoring points as outlined in his memorandum dated May 2, 2003 because the projects in the Heart of Boynton are smaller. Members questioned under "Project Quality" if points for "live/work units" should be applicable. Mr. Hutchinson pointed out that the City's Planning and Zoning Department is working on a definition for "live/work units." Attorney Payne noted that when the City comes up with this definition, it would apply to the Heart of 20 Meeting Minutes Continued Community Redevelopment Agency Regular Meeting Boynton Beach, Florida May 15, 2003 Boynton and Mr. Hutchinson said that this was his intent. Chairman Finkelstein requested that until the City came up with this definition, it should be eliminated from the scoring. Chairman Finkelstein inquired if "Project Location" would include the entire Heart of Boynton and Mr. Hutchinson responded that it did. With regard to points for projects that only contain "fee simple residential unit ownership" members did not think that there should be credit for single-family residential units. Mr. Hutchinson stated that this would apply to condominiums and townhouse developments. Ms. Hoyland suggested adding "multi-family" after "simple" and before "residential." Mr. Hutchinson pointed out that the Heart of Boynton is different from the downtown development and there are a lot of social issues that have to be addressed, thus he is recommending points for community needs space. Ms. Hoyland did not want to see any assisted living facilities in the Heart of Boynton and felt that this could cover a wide range of uses, such as group homes, drug abuse rehabilitation, etc. Mr. Hutchinson said that the residents in this area have expressed a desire to have these types of services available. Chairman Finkelstein noted that even if this were eliminated from the point system, it would not preclude the Board from approving a project that might be of similar use. There was a consensus to remove bullet ~4 from the scoring system. (Mr. Fenton left the meeting at 10:35 p.m.) Motion Vice Chair Heavilin moved to accept the Direct Incentive Program Revisions for the Heart of Boynton with the deletion of bullet ~4 regarding Project Quality. Motion seconded by Ms. Hoyland and unanimously carried. Vice Chair Heavilin requested that the agendas be reviewed prior to the meeting since this meeting has gone past eight hours. Attorney Payne informed members that they could not discuss the agenda with the Director outside of a meeting. D. Consideration of RFQ for Feasibility Study for the Savage Creatures of Ancient Seas Project Mr. Hutchinson referred to the Request for Proposals included in the agenda packet. He noted that the title of the RFQ and the project number needs to be added. Chairman Finkelstein requested that the acronym "SQO" be defined and that the correct acronym is "SOQ". Chairman Finkelstein referred to Section 4.1 21 Meeting Minutes Continued Community Redevelopment Agency Regular Meeting Boynton Beach, Florida May15,2003 ("Procurement Objectives") and thought the language was too specific. Mr. Hutchinson pointed out that if the entity did not have operating knowledge, it would be hard for them to do a feasibility study. Chairman Finkelstein did not think that a person doing a feasibility study needed to have operating knowledge of a museum. Mr. Hutchinson said he would not feel comfortable with a firm that did not have knowledge of the operational aspect of the project. Mr. Hutchinson also thought that it was important that the firm be connected to paleontology. Mr. Aguila did not think it was necessary that the firm have a paleontologist on their staff, but would have to have access to one. Motion Ms. Hoyland moved to approve the RFQ for the feasibility study for the Savage Creatures of Ancient Seas Project, subject to the comments made tonight. Motion seconded by Mr. Aguila and unanimously carried. Consider Recommendation to Limit "Payment in Lieu of Parking" Program in the CBD Mr. Hutchinson referred to his memo dated May 2, 2003 in the agenda packet and the City Commission Agenda Item, which addressed increasing the fees. After discussion, members felt that the fees should be raised and requested that the Board send a letter of support in raising the fees to the City Commission. Motion Ms. Hoyland moved to forward a letter to the City Commission that states that the CRA Board is in general agreement with the agenda item that was presented to the Board regarding the in-lieu-fee parking structure changes. Motion seconded by Vice Chair Heavilin and unanimously carried. X. Other Items A. Purchasing Manual (Moved from Consent) The newest version was distributed to members. Chairman Finkelstein asked if there were any comments or suggestions. Hearing none, Chairman Finkelstein passed the gavel to Vice Chair Heavilin. Motion Chairman Finkelstein moved to accept the Community Redevelopment Purchasing Manual as revised May 15, 2003. Motion seconded by Mr. Aguila and unanimously carried. 22 Meeting Minutes Continued Community Redevelopment Agency Regular Meeting Boynton Beach, Florida May 15, 2003 XI. Adjournment There being no further p.m. Respectfully submitted, business, the meeting properly adjourned at 10:55 Barbara M. Madden Recording Secretary (May 19, 2003) 23